COVID-19 Vaccine Tracker (News and Updates) (Poll added)

[Habit7]

^^^
For the gazillionth time
From the WHO website
Even if you have already had COVID-19, you should be vaccinated when it is offered to you. The protection that someone gains from having COVID-19 will vary from person to person, and we also don’t know how long natural immunity might last.
So continue to let JUHN Scarfy mislead you all with that 6 month sheit.

Well you are not exactly Mr. Current Affairs are you
https://tt.loopnews.com/content/post-co ... s-says-cmo

WHO website doesn't say that so, like the mythical 6 months that the NawhCMO tried to sell us before, 3 months is equally so, but I guess your God and his imps says so, so you unquestioningly take it and not only regurgitate it, but defend it in the face of facts.

Really, what does the WHO website say? What is this "face of facts" you are referring to?

[paid_influencer]

moot point. Rowley bring back his 'vaccine ready date' to July and co-incidentally we getting either Pfizer or Moderna that month from Kamala.

[De Dragon]

^^^
For the gazillionth time
From the WHO website
Even if you have already had COVID-19, you should be vaccinated when it is offered to you. The protection that someone gains from having COVID-19 will vary from person to person, and we also don’t know how long natural immunity might last.
So continue to let JUHN Scarfy mislead you all with that 6 month sheit.

Well you are not exactly Mr. Current Affairs are you
https://tt.loopnews.com/content/post-co ... s-says-cmo

WHO website doesn't say that so, like the mythical 6 months that the NawhCMO tried to sell us before, 3 months is equally so, but I guess your God and his imps says so, so you unquestioningly take it and not only regurgitate it, but defend it in the face of facts.

Really, what does the WHO website say? What is this "face of facts" you are referring to?

Jhatulal, that section in bold is directly from the WHO website. Ent ollour always asking for "facts" and "sources of information?" Well look it dey in yuh face! Of course you're welcome to visit the WHO site yourself and see.

[De Dragon]

Why do you call him JUHN Scarfy us that an inside joke or sum that only you know?

^^^
For the gazillionth time
From the WHO website
Even if you have already had COVID-19, you should be vaccinated when it is offered to you. The protection that someone gains from having COVID-19 will vary from person to person, and we also don’t know how long natural immunity might last.
So continue to let JUHN Scarfy mislead you all with that 6 month sheit.

B4 the 2NR Racist Police like Tuntsy, and especially Red Colostomy Bag offer their explanations

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q ... k2bhh4k3Ib

De link working just like your explanation. Screenshot_20210629-082925.png

Typical lazy LFD RFD PNM clown, everything hah tuh be handed to ollour

Malcolm tells the parable of "house Negro."
King Solomon Baptist Church, Detroit. 10 November 1963.

Transcribed text from audio excerpt.

To understand this, you have to go back to what the young brother here referred to as the house Negro and the field Negro back during slavery. There were two kinds of slaves, the house Negro and the field Negro. The house Negroes--they lived in the house with master, they dressed pretty good, they ate good because they ate his food--what he left. They lived in the attic or the basement, but still they lived near their master; and they loved their master more than their master loved himself. They would give their life to save their master's house--quicker than the master would. If the master said, "We got a good house here," the house Negro would say, "Yeah, we got a good house here." Whenever the master said "we," he said "we." That's how you can tell a house Negro.

If the master's house caught on fire, the house Negro would fight harder to put the blaze out than the master would. If the master go sick, the house Negro would say, "What's the matter, boss, we sick?" We sick! He identified himself with his master, more than his master identified with himself. And if you came to the house Negro and said, "Let's run away, let's escape, let's separate." The house Negro would look at you and say, "Man, you crazy. What you mean, separate? Where is there a better house than this? Where can I wear better clothes than this? Where can I eat better food than this?" That was that house Negro. In those days he was called a "house fella." And that's what we call them today, because we've still got some house afro trini running around here.

This modern house Negro loves his master. He wants to live near him. He'll pay three times as much as the house is worth just to live near his master, and then brag about "I'm the only Negro out here." "I'm the only one on my job." "I'm the only one in this school." You're nothing but a house Negro. And if someone comes to you right now and says, "Let's separate," you say the same thing that the house Negro said on the plantation. "What you mean, separate? From America, this good white man? Where you going to get a better job than you get here?" I mean, this is what you say. "I ain't left nothing in Africa," that's what you say. Why, you left your mind in Africa.

X, Malcolm. "Message to the Grass Roots." Northern Negro Grass Roots Leadership Conference. Group on Advanced Leadership. King Solomon Baptist Church, Detroit. 10 November 1963

[Habit7]

^^^
For the gazillionth time
From the WHO website
Even if you have already had COVID-19, you should be vaccinated when it is offered to you. The protection that someone gains from having COVID-19 will vary from person to person, and we also don’t know how long natural immunity might last.
So continue to let JUHN Scarfy mislead you all with that 6 month sheit.

Well you are not exactly Mr. Current Affairs are you
https://tt.loopnews.com/content/post-co ... s-says-cmo

WHO website doesn't say that so, like the mythical 6 months that the NawhCMO tried to sell us before, 3 months is equally so, but I guess your God and his imps says so, so you unquestioningly take it and not only regurgitate it, but defend it in the face of facts.

Really, what does the WHO website say? What is this "face of facts" you are referring to?

Jhatulal, that section in bold is directly from the WHO website. Ent ollour always asking for "facts" and "sources of information?" Well look it dey in yuh face! Of course you're welcome to visit the WHO site yourself and see.

I called you out to see what type of spin you will come with to avoid the answer. It was the typical vague, unimaginative tripe you normally give. Let me see your best beat up after this.

Based on current data, symptomatic reinfection is uncommon within 6 months after an initial natural infection, and in the context of limited vaccine supply, persons with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the preceding 6 months may choose to delay vaccination until near the end of this period. However, emerging data indicate that symptomatic reinfection may occur in settings where variants with evidence of immune escape are circulating, and in these settings, earlier vaccination after infection may be advisable. The length of this time period may be revised when more data on duration of immunity after natural infection become available.
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source ... ner-24.pdf

[redmanjp]

https://news.yahoo.com/study-suggests-pfizer-moderna-covid-131904210.html

Study suggests Pfizer, Moderna COVID-19 vaccines could provide 'years' of protection

A new study reportedly suggests the COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna could provide protection for "years."

As The New York Times reports, scientists in a new study sought to determine whether "vaccination alone" will provide long-lasting protection against COVID-19 after research suggested the vaccines may offer years of protection for those who were previously infected with the coronavirus. The study consisted of 41 people who received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine, and the researchers extracted samples from lymph nodes of 14 participants. They found that 15 weeks after the first dose, "the number of memory cells that recognized the coronavirus had not declined," the Times writes.

"The fact that the reactions continued for almost four months after vaccination — that's a very, very good sign," Washington University in St. Louis immunologist Ali Ellebedy, who led the study, told the Times.

This suggested, the Times writes, that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines could "protect against the coronavirus for years," or "at least, against the existing coronavirus variants." The report notes that even if that's the case, COVID-19 vaccine boosters might still be necessary for some, including older adults and those with weak immune systems. But University of Arizona immunologist Deepta Bhattacharya told the Times, "Anything that would actually require a booster would be variant-based, not based on waning of immunity. I just don't see that happening." Read more at The New York Times.

[De Dragon]

^^^
For the gazillionth time
From the WHO website
Even if you have already had COVID-19, you should be vaccinated when it is offered to you. The protection that someone gains from having COVID-19 will vary from person to person, and we also don’t know how long natural immunity might last.
So continue to let JUHN Scarfy mislead you all with that 6 month sheit.

Well you are not exactly Mr. Current Affairs are you
https://tt.loopnews.com/content/post-co ... s-says-cmo

WHO website doesn't say that so, like the mythical 6 months that the NawhCMO tried to sell us before, 3 months is equally so, but I guess your God and his imps says so, so you unquestioningly take it and not only regurgitate it, but defend it in the face of facts.

Really, what does the WHO website say? What is this "face of facts" you are referring to?

Jhatulal, that section in bold is directly from the WHO website. Ent ollour always asking for "facts" and "sources of information?" Well look it dey in yuh face! Of course you're welcome to visit the WHO site yourself and see.

I called you out to see what type of spin you will come with to avoid the answer. It was the typical vague, unimaginative tripe you normally give. Let me see your best beat up after this.

Based on current data, symptomatic reinfection is uncommon within 6 months after an initial natural infection, and in the context of limited vaccine supply, persons with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the preceding 6 months may choose to delay vaccination until near the end of this period. However, emerging data indicate that symptomatic reinfection may occur in settings where variants with evidence of immune escape are circulating, and in these settings, earlier vaccination after infection may be advisable. The length of this time period may be revised when more data on duration of immunity after natural infection become available.
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source ... ner-24.pdf

I know you're accustomed to dealing with your LFD RFD PNM low IQ friends and partners, but don't try that sheit with me.
JUHN Scarfy tested positive in APRIL, the same day the Nawh CMO LIED to say he can't take any vaccine for 6 months. JUHN Scarfy repeated the lie when he was braced in Parliament just a few days ago.
Not only is YOUR link is dated May 24th 2021, it is specific to Sinopharm, but JUHN Scarfy was scheduled to receive the Astra Zeneca vaccine in April, the very same day when he tested positive.
Here's a helpful suggestion, STOP "calling out" people, it ALWAYS ends badly for you

[Habit7]

I know you're accustomed to dealing with your LFD RFD PNM low IQ friends and partners, but don't try that sheit with me.
JUHN Scarfy tested positive in APRIL, the same day the Nawh CMO LIED to say he can't take any vaccine for 6 months. JUHN Scarfy repeated the lie when he was braced in Parliament just a few days ago.
Not only is YOUR link is dated May 24th 2021, it is specific to Sinopharm, but JUHN Scarfy was scheduled to receive the Astra Zeneca vaccine in April, the very same day when he tested positive.
Here's a helpful suggestion, STOP "calling out" people, it ALWAYS ends badly for you

So you have some conspiracy theory that the CMO compromised his professional integrity and is bending to the secret will of PM to delay receiving the vaccine. The MoH dictated this position before the PM got covid, the WHO dictated this position, and the CMO recently adjusted this position as shown in the document that I showed you above especially since Sinopharm is the vaccine we currently most use. But since you want to see the WHO guidelines before the PM got covid, here it is:

Within 6 months after an initial natural infection, available data show that symptomatic reinfection is uncommon. Given limited vaccine supply, persons with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the preceding 6 months may therefore choose to delay vaccination until near the end of this period.
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/han ... .2-eng.pdf

For a high IQ guy like yourself, you seem to be holding on to the conspiracy theories and the lack of evidence of low IQ ppl. Your high IQ somehow inhibits your reading and comprehension because when WHO says, "if you have already had COVID-19, you should be vaccinated when it is offered to you" it doesn't mean you should take it the day after your negative test. It is a general statement that implies that the medical professionals guided by the individual vaccine guidelines will offer it to you when they see fit. Our MoH determined initially that it was 6mths before KCR got covid and recently amended it to 3mths. But you, sounding as informed as someone who believes 5G causes covid, thinks that only Dr Parasram is holding this view being informed by KCR and not the WHO.

[elec2020]

https://news.yahoo.com/study-suggests-pfizer-moderna-covid-131904210.html

Study suggests Pfizer, Moderna COVID-19 vaccines could provide 'years' of protection

A new study reportedly suggests the COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna could provide protection for "years."

As The New York Times reports, scientists in a new study sought to determine whether "vaccination alone" will provide long-lasting protection against COVID-19 after research suggested the vaccines may offer years of protection for those who were previously infected with the coronavirus. The study consisted of 41 people who received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine, and the researchers extracted samples from lymph nodes of 14 participants. They found that 15 weeks after the first dose, "the number of memory cells that recognized the coronavirus had not declined," the Times writes.

"The fact that the reactions continued for almost four months after vaccination — that's a very, very good sign," Washington University in St. Louis immunologist Ali Ellebedy, who led the study, told the Times.

This suggested, the Times writes, that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines could "protect against the coronavirus for years," or "at least, against the existing coronavirus variants." The report notes that even if that's the case, COVID-19 vaccine boosters might still be necessary for some, including older adults and those with weak immune systems. But University of Arizona immunologist Deepta Bhattacharya told the Times, "Anything that would actually require a booster would be variant-based, not based on waning of immunity. I just don't see that happening." Read more at The New York Times.

a study of 41 people? Wow the standards of the scientific community have really fallen. This sample is nowhere big enough to make definitive statements of the population. For instance, does the 41 people cover: all age groups; people living in all counties of the state; all ethnicities; all manner of pertinent lifestyle diseases (obesity, diabetes, etc); levels of health (for instance, low bp, physically fit, takes regular vitamins, etc.); eating habits (vegan, vegetarian, etc.). Wow. This is shameful. Who thought this was good enough to publish?

[death365]

when can i take off my mask !!!!

its 2 weeks since my 2nd sin--no--farm shot ... im good to go now right , just walk round with the lil piece of cardboard they give meh

[VexXx Dogg]

https://news.yahoo.com/study-suggests-pfizer-moderna-covid-131904210.html

Study suggests Pfizer, Moderna COVID-19 vaccines could provide 'years' of protection

A new study reportedly suggests the COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna could provide protection for "years."

As The New York Times reports, scientists in a new study sought to determine whether "vaccination alone" will provide long-lasting protection against COVID-19 after research suggested the vaccines may offer years of protection for those who were previously infected with the coronavirus. The study consisted of 41 people who received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine, and the researchers extracted samples from lymph nodes of 14 participants. They found that 15 weeks after the first dose, "the number of memory cells that recognized the coronavirus had not declined," the Times writes.

"The fact that the reactions continued for almost four months after vaccination — that's a very, very good sign," Washington University in St. Louis immunologist Ali Ellebedy, who led the study, told the Times.

This suggested, the Times writes, that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines could "protect against the coronavirus for years," or "at least, against the existing coronavirus variants." The report notes that even if that's the case, COVID-19 vaccine boosters might still be necessary for some, including older adults and those with weak immune systems. But University of Arizona immunologist Deepta Bhattacharya told the Times, "Anything that would actually require a booster would be variant-based, not based on waning of immunity. I just don't see that happening." Read more at The New York Times.

a study of 41 people? Wow the standards of the scientific community have really fallen. This sample is nowhere big enough to make definitive statements of the population. For instance, does the 41 people cover: all age groups; people living in all counties of the state; all ethnicities; all manner of pertinent lifestyle diseases (obesity, diabetes, etc); levels of health (for instance, low bp, physically fit, takes regular vitamins, etc.); eating habits (vegan, vegetarian, etc.). Wow. This is shameful. Who thought this was good enough to publish?

That could be a student research paper that some media house decided to run and massage to fit their agenda.
41 is low to generalise, but can lead to further research opportunities

[adnj]

https://news.yahoo.com/study-suggests-pfizer-moderna-covid-131904210.html

Study suggests Pfizer, Moderna COVID-19 vaccines could provide 'years' of protection

A new study reportedly suggests the COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna could provide protection for "years."

As The New York Times reports, scientists in a new study sought to determine whether "vaccination alone" will provide long-lasting protection against COVID-19 after research suggested the vaccines may offer years of protection for those who were previously infected with the coronavirus. The study consisted of 41 people who received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine, and the researchers extracted samples from lymph nodes of 14 participants. They found that 15 weeks after the first dose, "the number of memory cells that recognized the coronavirus had not declined," the Times writes.

"The fact that the reactions continued for almost four months after vaccination — that's a very, very good sign," Washington University in St. Louis immunologist Ali Ellebedy, who led the study, told the Times.

This suggested, the Times writes, that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines could "protect against the coronavirus for years," or "at least, against the existing coronavirus variants." The report notes that even if that's the case, COVID-19 vaccine boosters might still be necessary for some, including older adults and those with weak immune systems. But University of Arizona immunologist Deepta Bhattacharya told the Times, "Anything that would actually require a booster would be variant-based, not based on waning of immunity. I just don't see that happening." Read more at The New York Times.

a study of 41 people? Wow the standards of the scientific community have really fallen. This sample is nowhere big enough to make definitive statements of the population. For instance, does the 41 people cover: all age groups; people living in all counties of the state; all ethnicities; all manner of pertinent lifestyle diseases (obesity, diabetes, etc); levels of health (for instance, low bp, physically fit, takes regular vitamins, etc.); eating habits (vegan, vegetarian, etc.). Wow. This is shameful. Who thought this was good enough to publish?

The size of the test group was entirely appropriate.

[elec2020]

^ it can lead to further research opportunities but it is very misleading as 7.674 billion (the world population) significantly dwarfs 41. Imo, 50,000 to 100,000 is a better sample size to make such definitive statements.

[VexXx Dogg]

^ it can lead to further research opportunities but it is very misleading as 7.674 billion (the world population) significantly dwarfs 41. Imo, 50,000 to 100,000 is a better sample size to make such definitive statements.

I want to see the paper. I doubt the researchers made that claim of generalisation, in most papers they actually caution against it. The media house very likely did that

[elec2020]

https://news.yahoo.com/study-suggests-pfizer-moderna-covid-131904210.html

Study suggests Pfizer, Moderna COVID-19 vaccines could provide 'years' of protection

A new study reportedly suggests the COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna could provide protection for "years."

As The New York Times reports, scientists in a new study sought to determine whether "vaccination alone" will provide long-lasting protection against COVID-19 after research suggested the vaccines may offer years of protection for those who were previously infected with the coronavirus. The study consisted of 41 people who received two doses of the Pfizer vaccine, and the researchers extracted samples from lymph nodes of 14 participants. They found that 15 weeks after the first dose, "the number of memory cells that recognized the coronavirus had not declined," the Times writes.

"The fact that the reactions continued for almost four months after vaccination — that's a very, very good sign," Washington University in St. Louis immunologist Ali Ellebedy, who led the study, told the Times.

This suggested, the Times writes, that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines could "protect against the coronavirus for years," or "at least, against the existing coronavirus variants." The report notes that even if that's the case, COVID-19 vaccine boosters might still be necessary for some, including older adults and those with weak immune systems. But University of Arizona immunologist Deepta Bhattacharya told the Times, "Anything that would actually require a booster would be variant-based, not based on waning of immunity. I just don't see that happening." Read more at The New York Times.

a study of 41 people? Wow the standards of the scientific community have really fallen. This sample is nowhere big enough to make definitive statements of the population. For instance, does the 41 people cover: all age groups; people living in all counties of the state; all ethnicities; all manner of pertinent lifestyle diseases (obesity, diabetes, etc); levels of health (for instance, low bp, physically fit, takes regular vitamins, etc.); eating habits (vegan, vegetarian, etc.). Wow. This is shameful. Who thought this was good enough to publish?

The size of the test group was entirely appropriate.

you comparing apples with oranges. though When it comes to new drugs, you will obviously start off small as u don't want to negatively impact alot of people with your first version of the drug (for example, if the first experiment of the drug caused cancer then you would have 10,000 people with cancer, that is a logistical nightmare). As you further refine the product and make it safer then u can open up the sample size. With the previous highlighted article, we looking at how long immunity lasts in the vaccinated. These 41 can all be outliers as, as stated, they in no shape or form capture enough characteristics of the target population to make such definitive statements. Thus, the sample sizes for testing the drug are appropriate, but the sample size to make definitive statements on efficacy are insufficient. In fact, in your same infographic note that the sample size is opened up as the drug reaches its final stages. That is to ensure that statements made on efficacy have more weight to them. For example, how on earth can i say that if 40 people ate shellfish and only 5 showed negative reactions then most people in the world are not allergic to shellfish.

[elec2020]

^ it can lead to further research opportunities but it is very misleading as 7.674 billion (the world population) significantly dwarfs 41. Imo, 50,000 to 100,000 is a better sample size to make such definitive statements.

I want to see the paper. I doubt the researchers made that claim of generalisation, in most papers they actually caution against it. The media house very likely did that

Me too. I will also be surprised if it is published in any noteworthy journal as, as stated, that sample size is way too small. Not discounting the work that they did eh, but it opens itself to alot of criticism.

[adnj]

^ it can lead to further research opportunities but it is very misleading as 7.674 billion (the world population) significantly dwarfs 41. Imo, 50,000 to 100,000 is a better sample size to make such definitive statements.

I want to see the paper. I doubt the researchers made that claim of generalisation, in most papers they actually caution against it. The media house very likely did that

No general claim was made.

SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines induce persistent human germinal centre responses



Abstract

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccines are ~95% effective in preventing coronavirus disease 20191–5. The dynamics of antibody secreting plasmablasts (PBs) and germinal centre (GC) B cells induced by these vaccines in humans remain unclear. We examined antigen-specific B cell responses in peripheral blood (n=41) and draining lymph nodes (LNs) in 14 individuals who received two doses of BNT162b2, an mRNA-based vaccine encoding full-length SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) gene1. Circulating IgG- and IgA-secreting PBs targeting the S protein peaked one week after the second immunization then declined, becoming undetectable three weeks later. These PB responses preceded maximal levels of serum anti-S binding and neutralizing antibodies to an early circulating SARS-CoV-2 strain as well as emerging variants, especially in individuals previously infected with SARS-CoV-2, who produced the most robust serologic responses. By examining fine needle aspirates (FNAs) of draining axillary LNs, we identified GC B cells that bound S protein in all participants sampled after primary immunization. Remarkably, high frequencies of S-binding GC B cells and PBs were sustained in these draining LNs for at least twelve weeks after the booster immunization. S-binding GC B cell-derived monoclonal antibodies predominantly targeted the receptor binding domain of the S protein, with fewer clones binding to the N-terminal domain or to epitopes shared with the S proteins of the human betacoronaviruses OC43 and HKU1. The latter cross-reactive B cell clones had higher levels of somatic hypermutation compared to those that only recognized SARS-CoV-2 S protein, suggesting a memory B cell origin. Our studies demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-based vaccination of humans induces a persistent GC B cell response, enabling the generation of robust humoral immunity.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03738-2

[elec2020]

^ it can lead to further research opportunities but it is very misleading as 7.674 billion (the world population) significantly dwarfs 41. Imo, 50,000 to 100,000 is a better sample size to make such definitive statements.

I want to see the paper. I doubt the researchers made that claim of generalisation, in most papers they actually caution against it. The media house very likely did that

No general claim was made.

SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines induce persistent human germinal centre responses



Abstract

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccines are ~95% effective in preventing coronavirus disease 20191–5. The dynamics of antibody secreting plasmablasts (PBs) and germinal centre (GC) B cells induced by these vaccines in humans remain unclear. We examined antigen-specific B cell responses in peripheral blood (n=41) and draining lymph nodes (LNs) in 14 individuals who received two doses of BNT162b2, an mRNA-based vaccine encoding full-length SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) gene1. Circulating IgG- and IgA-secreting PBs targeting the S protein peaked one week after the second immunization then declined, becoming undetectable three weeks later. These PB responses preceded maximal levels of serum anti-S binding and neutralizing antibodies to an early circulating SARS-CoV-2 strain as well as emerging variants, especially in individuals previously infected with SARS-CoV-2, who produced the most robust serologic responses. By examining fine needle aspirates (FNAs) of draining axillary LNs, we identified GC B cells that bound S protein in all participants sampled after primary immunization. Remarkably, high frequencies of S-binding GC B cells and PBs were sustained in these draining LNs for at least twelve weeks after the booster immunization. S-binding GC B cell-derived monoclonal antibodies predominantly targeted the receptor binding domain of the S protein, with fewer clones binding to the N-terminal domain or to epitopes shared with the S proteins of the human betacoronaviruses OC43 and HKU1. The latter cross-reactive B cell clones had higher levels of somatic hypermutation compared to those that only recognized SARS-CoV-2 S protein, suggesting a memory B cell origin. Our studies demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-based vaccination of humans induces a persistent GC B cell response, enabling the generation of robust humoral immunity.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03738-2

isn't the bolded part a general claim? That, even though the paper is based on a sample size of 41, "Our studies demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-based vaccination of humans induces a persistent GC B cell response, enabling the generation of robust humoral immunity".

[adnj]

^ it can lead to further research opportunities but it is very misleading as 7.674 billion (the world population) significantly dwarfs 41. Imo, 50,000 to 100,000 is a better sample size to make such definitive statements.

I want to see the paper. I doubt the researchers made that claim of generalisation, in most papers they actually caution against it. The media house very likely did that

No general claim was made.

SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines induce persistent human germinal centre responses



Abstract

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccines are ~95% effective in preventing coronavirus disease 20191–5. The dynamics of antibody secreting plasmablasts (PBs) and germinal centre (GC) B cells induced by these vaccines in humans remain unclear. We examined antigen-specific B cell responses in peripheral blood (n=41) and draining lymph nodes (LNs) in 14 individuals who received two doses of BNT162b2, an mRNA-based vaccine encoding full-length SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) gene1. Circulating IgG- and IgA-secreting PBs targeting the S protein peaked one week after the second immunization then declined, becoming undetectable three weeks later. These PB responses preceded maximal levels of serum anti-S binding and neutralizing antibodies to an early circulating SARS-CoV-2 strain as well as emerging variants, especially in individuals previously infected with SARS-CoV-2, who produced the most robust serologic responses. By examining fine needle aspirates (FNAs) of draining axillary LNs, we identified GC B cells that bound S protein in all participants sampled after primary immunization. Remarkably, high frequencies of S-binding GC B cells and PBs were sustained in these draining LNs for at least twelve weeks after the booster immunization. S-binding GC B cell-derived monoclonal antibodies predominantly targeted the receptor binding domain of the S protein, with fewer clones binding to the N-terminal domain or to epitopes shared with the S proteins of the human betacoronaviruses OC43 and HKU1. The latter cross-reactive B cell clones had higher levels of somatic hypermutation compared to those that only recognized SARS-CoV-2 S protein, suggesting a memory B cell origin. Our studies demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-based vaccination of humans induces a persistent GC B cell response, enabling the generation of robust humoral immunity.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03738-2

isn't the bolded part a general claim? That, even though the paper is based on a sample size of 41, "Our studies demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-based vaccination of humans induces a persistent GC B cell response, enabling the generation of robust humoral immunity".

No. It speaks specifically to B lymphocyte production in the bone marrow migrating to the lymphnodes without deprecation.

[elec2020]

^ okay

[hover11]

It actually have ppl that think taking sinopharm makes you invincible

:?: when can i take off my mask !!!!

its 2 weeks since my 2nd sin--no--farm shot ... im good to go now right , just walk round with the lil piece of cardboard they give meh

[redmanjp]

It actually have ppp that think taking sinopharm makes you invincible

:?: when can i take off my mask !!!!

its 2 weeks since my 2nd sin--no--farm shot ... im good to go now right , just walk round with the lil piece of cardboard they give meh

only ppl with access to the 'Rolls Royce' mRNA vaccines have that privilege. but now with delta spreading fast a few places reintroducing masks

[paid_influencer]

It actually have ppp that think taking sinopharm makes you invincible

:?: when can i take off my mask !!!!

its 2 weeks since my 2nd sin--no--farm shot ... im good to go now right , just walk round with the lil piece of cardboard they give meh

dais d danger point. if it was hard to get them to wear mask before... now that they vaccinated why should they care if mask on chin?

and boom, outbreak again lockdown and ppl dead are starvation

[MaxPower]

Team,

I’ve decided to get vaccinated.

Where can i get the Astra Zeneca?

[redmanjp]

Accidental intravenous injection possibly linked to blood clots

[De Dragon]

I know you're accustomed to dealing with your LFD RFD PNM low IQ friends and partners, but don't try that sheit with me.
JUHN Scarfy tested positive in APRIL, the same day the Nawh CMO LIED to say he can't take any vaccine for 6 months. JUHN Scarfy repeated the lie when he was braced in Parliament just a few days ago.
Not only is YOUR link is dated May 24th 2021, it is specific to Sinopharm, but JUHN Scarfy was scheduled to receive the Astra Zeneca vaccine in April, the very same day when he tested positive.
Here's a helpful suggestion, STOP "calling out" people, it ALWAYS ends badly for you

So you have some conspiracy theory that the CMO compromised his professional integrity and is bending to the secret will of PM to delay receiving the vaccine. The MoH dictated this position before the PM got covid, the WHO dictated this position, and the CMO recently adjusted this position as shown in the document that I showed you above especially since Sinopharm is the vaccine we currently most use. But since you want to see the WHO guidelines before the PM got covid, here it is:

Within 6 months after an initial natural infection, available data show that symptomatic reinfection is uncommon. Given limited vaccine supply, persons with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the preceding 6 months may therefore choose to delay vaccination until near the end of this period.
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/han ... .2-eng.pdf

For a high IQ guy like yourself, you seem to be holding on to the conspiracy theories and the lack of evidence of low IQ ppl. Your high IQ somehow inhibits your reading and comprehension because when WHO says, "if you have already had COVID-19, you should be vaccinated when it is offered to you" it doesn't mean you should take it the day after your negative test. It is a general statement that implies that the medical professionals guided by the individual vaccine guidelines will offer it to you when they see fit. Our MoH determined initially that it was 6mths before KCR got covid and recently amended it to 3mths. But you, sounding as informed as someone who believes 5G causes covid, thinks that only Dr Parasram is holding this view being informed by KCR and not the WHO.

Don't be an Arse and show it WHERE did the Nawh CMO get 6 months from? Where did he get that 6 months to on the VERY day JUHN Scarfy was supposed to get the vaccine justify it? CERTAINLY NOT from the WHO at the time.

[De Dragon]

Team,

I’ve decided to get vaccinated.

Where can i get the Astra Zeneca?

You eh getting dat in Venezuela. Yuh hadda take Sputty

[Habit7]

Don't be an Arse and show it WHERE did the Nawh CMO get 6 months from? Where did he get that 6 months to on the VERY day JUHN Scarfy was supposed to get the vaccine justify it? CERTAINLY NOT from the WHO at the time.

Ah yes, the expected beat up when you know you are wrong but refuse to admit it. These are the WHO guidelines for AZ and Sinopharm, you reject them not because they are wrong, not because you have newer and better research. You reject them when they started applying to KCR. You are a political hack.

Within 6 months after an initial natural infection, available data show that symptomatic reinfection is uncommon. Given limited vaccine supply, persons with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the preceding 6 months may therefore choose to delay vaccination until near the end of this period.
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/han ... .2-eng.pdf

Based on current data, symptomatic reinfection is uncommon within 6 months after an initial natural infection, and in the context of limited vaccine supply, persons with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the preceding 6 months may choose to delay vaccination until near the end of this period. However, emerging data indicate that symptomatic reinfection may occur in settings where variants with evidence of immune escape are circulating, and in these settings, earlier vaccination after infection may be advisable. The length of this time period may be revised when more data on duration of immunity after natural infection become available.
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source ... ner-24.pdf

[elec2020]

[zoom rader]

Don't be an Arse and show it WHERE did the Nawh CMO get 6 months from? Where did he get that 6 months to on the VERY day JUHN Scarfy was supposed to get the vaccine justify it? CERTAINLY NOT from the WHO at the time.

Ah yes, the expected beat up when you know you are wrong but refuse to admit it. These are the WHO guidelines for AZ and Sinopharm, you reject them not because they are wrong, not because you have newer and better research. You reject them when they started applying to KCR. You are a political hack.

Within 6 months after an initial natural infection, available data show that symptomatic reinfection is uncommon. Given limited vaccine supply, persons with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the preceding 6 months may therefore choose to delay vaccination until near the end of this period.
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/han ... .2-eng.pdf

Based on current data, symptomatic reinfection is uncommon within 6 months after an initial natural infection, and in the context of limited vaccine supply, persons with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the preceding 6 months may choose to delay vaccination until near the end of this period. However, emerging data indicate that symptomatic reinfection may occur in settings where variants with evidence of immune escape are circulating, and in these settings, earlier vaccination after infection may be advisable. The length of this time period may be revised when more data on duration of immunity after natural infection become available.
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source ... ner-24.pdf

Means nutting if you can't travel to Canada with a Sinopharm vaccines